Apprise vs Conductor OSS
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Apprise
Send notifications to dozens of services from one library
VS
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
| Feature | Apprise | Conductor OSS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Python | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, binary | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 17,011 | ★ 32,066 |
| First released | 2017 | 2016 |
| Replaces | Pushover | AWS Step Functions, Camunda |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Apprise or Conductor OSS better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Apprise is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Apprise and Conductor OSS free and open-source?
Yes. Apprise is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and Conductor OSS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Apprise and Conductor OSS with Docker?
Apprise: yes. Conductor OSS: yes.